Non-Dualistic thought applied to issues

Here’s an example of non-dualistic thinking, this one applied to discussions of advantaged or disadvantaged groups due to issues of race, gender, orientation or whatever…
1) X’s can on average, perform worse than Y’s without Y’s being superior in any way. Y’s would suffer the same stress and dysfunction, complain as much and X’s would give the same self-serving excuses, and explanations and be just as deeply in denial were conditions reversed.
2) INDIVIDUAL X’s cannot let this fact stop them. If they do, their lives suffer. If they are to be happy, healthy, and successful they may well have to work 150% as hard, long, or smart to get 100% of the results a Y might get just for being born in the right position. It is not fair, especially when Y’s tend to develop the “born on third base and thought they hit a triple” attitude, and spit on your efforts. But it isn’t “unfair” in any cosmic sense either. It just…is. You either deal with it or you don’t. Try standing on the shoreline and screaming it is unfair for the waves to wet your shoes. It doesn’t care.
3) Almost everyone has aspect where they are an X, others where they are a Y compared to others. This does NOT “even out” overall, but it is a useful perspective: we can all be oblivious to our advantages. An attitude I’ve found useful: There is always someone worse off than you, doing better with the resources they have.
4) If ANYONE of your group, starting from where you started, has succeeded, study what they did.  The more you can find, the more accurate your information will become.  Again, I’m NOT saying that Y’s would have a larger percentage of successful people given the same stresses: that is what bigots think.  I’m saying that in terms of your happiness,health and success you are riding a motorcycle through a forest, and have to focus on the space between the trees.  Focus on the trees, and you will crash.  And to repeat again: if the average X is crashing, so would the average Y.
If you, and your family, and your loved ones and community are to survive, you must spend 80% of your time focused on solutions, only 20% on the problem. That’s on you. But you might take comfort in remembering that, were that mocking, insulting, condescending Y in your situation, he would bleet just as loudly. In fact, the less empathy they show, I strongly suspect the more they’d “crack” under the same pressure.
But remember:  you would, on average, be just as blind and oblivious.
That’s just how humans roll.


  1. I would disagree. If X and Y have the same problem. There’s only one way to solve the problem and that’s to go to Z. Y’s problem is taken care of by Z because Y is his mentoree. X’s problem isn’t taken care of because Z is “looking out” for his protégé. Now what? Work harder and come back to the same crook in the road?


    1. X and Y cannot have the same problem unless they have the same initial conditions AND the same external stimulus. And if that is true, they are not X and Y, they are both X.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s